The dark side of American exceptionalism

A demonstrator is held down during a simulation of waterboarding in Washington in 2007.

Kevin Lamarque, file photo: Reuters

Dick Cheney has chosen to defend his legacy of torture and abuse, but America as a whole must learn the lessons of this ugly chapter in its history, writes Tim Mayfield.

'American exceptionalism' has traditionally referred to the special character of the United States as a uniquely free nation based on democratic ideals and personal liberty.

Nevertheless, the damning Senate report on the use of torture by the CIA exposes the darker side of this grand theory.

Indeed, the report confirms what many of us had long suspected, namely, that in the post 9/11 years the ends did come to justify the means in the minds of those that mattered amongst the American political elite.

Moreover, the CIA became a willing and enthusiastic weapon of choice in this global 'War on Terror'.

In seeking to understand the collective mentality that allowed such abuses to occur, it is instructive to note that no other Western liberal democracy has an organisation that matches the CIA in the scope of its powers or the extent of its resourcing. Nor do equivalent intelligence agencies have a remit that is so expansive and therefore so ill-defined.

The evolution of the CIA into such a multi-faceted and prominent branch of the US government is, I would argue, a direct result of the dark side of American exceptionalism. Likewise, the decision by the Second Bush Administration to use the agency to carry out widespread torture and human rights abuses represents the worst instincts in US foreign policy.

Even now, there must be doubt as to how much the lessons of this ugly chapter in US history have been taken on board.

It is perhaps predictable that key Republicans, including former vice-president Dick Cheney, have chosen to defend this legacy of torture and abuse - it occurred, after all, at their instigation. However, the lack of introspection, remorse, or even equivocation that has been evident on the part of some current Republican Party leaders, including Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, raises the question of whether it could all happen again.

Despite President Obama's decision to end the 'enhanced interrogation' program in 2009, there has been no fundamental overhaul of the legislative framework governing the agency or curtailment of its extraordinary reach.

We must also question how much cultural change has been enacted inside the CIA. For example, the apparent attitude of impunity reflected in the report was also evident in the recent revelation that agency officers had improperly spied upon Senate investigators probing the allegations of torture.

In the famous words of Edmund Burke, "Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it."

The Bush administration apparently learned nothing from the overreach that was evident in the 1980s through scandals such as the Iran-Contra Affair, nor did President Reagan learn from past outrages such as the CIA-instigated coup in which the democratically elected government of Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mossadegh was overthrown in 1953.

Why then would future US governments prove any more adept at incorporating the hard-bitten lessons of the failed experiment with torture that occurred in the shadow of 9/11?

Of course, we should not overlook the fact that the democratic principles of transparency and accountability have ultimately shed light on this dirty corner of America's foreign policy edifice. We must also contextualise this episode within the broad sweep of history, in which the US remains arguably the most benign superpower the world has seen.

Indeed, Washington's capacity for decisive and compelling leadership on the international stage was evident in President Obama's historic climate change deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

In this way, the US still has enormous potential to be a force for good in global affairs despite this most recent stain on in its reputation.

However, its ability to shape events beyond its shores will become increasingly constrained as it grapples with the inevitable and inexorable decline in its relative power as compared to the rising giants of China and India.

Thus, Washington's response to this latest Senate report will be symbolic of its broader attitude to the reality of its decreasing power.

If the CIA is allowed to continue to operate in its current unaccountable form then this will reflect the inability of the US to come to terms with its own changing circumstances. If, however, the report creates the impetus for reform of the CIA and the Government's broader intelligence apparatus, then this will be a clear sign that the US is adjusting to the new paradigm.

In this regard, Bill Clinton's remarks, made a decade ago, are prescient:

America has two choices. We can use our great and unprecedented military and economic power to try to stay top dog on the global block in perpetuity. Or we can seek to use that power to create a world in which we are comfortable living when we are no longer top dog on the global block.

We must now wait and see which path America's current political leaders will take.

Tim Mayfield is a freelance writer who has previously worked at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Department of Defence. He holds a Bachelor of Arts and a Master of Middle Eastern and Central Asian Studies from the ANU. View his full profile here.